The Administration strongly supports House passage of S.J.Res. 34, which would nullify the Federal Communications Commission’s final rule titled "Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunication Services," 81 Fed. Reg. 87274 (December 2, 2016). The rule applies the privacy requirements of the Communications Act of 1934 to broadband Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and other telecommunications carriers. In particular, the rule requires ISPs to obtain affirmative "opt-in" consent from consumers to use and share certain information, including app usage and web browsing history. It also allows ISPs to use and share other information, including e-mail addresses and service tier information, unless a customer "opts-out." In doing so, the rule departs from the technology-neutral framework for online privacy administered by the Federal Trade Commission. This results in rules that apply very different regulatory regimes based on the identity of the online actor.

If S.J.Res. 34 were presented to the President, his advisors would recommend that he sign the bill into law.

Here’s the fundamental mistake in the way the FCC has framed the proposal. Google, Facebook, Amazon and a myriad of other “edge providers” are not covered by the eventual privacy rules that will be drafted.

Their exclusion undermines the Commission’s laudable goals. There should be consistent, across the board rules for collecting and using consumer data regardless of the online company, platform, application or service being used.

Why is this so crucial? Because a narrow focus on just the ISPs is short sighted given the multiplicity of devices consumers use and will be using. It also doesn’t reflect reality and creates a piecemeal approach that will only create unnecessary confusion for consumers.

It’s likely that many consumers aren’t thinking about how they are specifically connecting to the Internet when they go online. They log on, go to a website and start roaming — from a particular business site then maybe to Facebook or Amazon or Snapchat via a mobile device and back and forth.

So where will consumers go if they have a privacy problem with their broadband ISP or Amazon, for example. The FCC’s coverage omission creates an unintended variation on “who’s on first?”

Here’s why. The FCC’s now expanded broadband ISP oversight has resulted in decreased privacy jurisdiction of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) with regard specifically to ISPs. So there will be FCC privacy rules for some online entities, a different set of FTC privacy rules for other entities and potentially no or conflicting rules for other online platforms.

This is especially important given the steps the Trump administration took to advance a bill through Congress to cancel the FCC order on “Internet Privacy” that President Obama engineered in October 2016 at the urging of Google.

That the White House was not abandoning Internet privacy, but transferring the rule-making on Internet privacy from the FCC to the FTC was made abundantly clear by White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer at the White House briefing on Thursday.

Americans should not fret, however, about the elimination of any ill-conceived rule.

Before the FCC nosed in, the Federal Trade Commission protected our digital privacy. The FTC’s privacy rules established a comprehensive set of consumer protections that applied to all firms on the Internet.

---

Passed on a party-line vote in October 2016, the FCC’s privacy rules subject Internet service providers (ISPs) to a stricter standard of scrutiny than their online advertising rivals. When it comes to using your data from web browsing and app usage, the FCC requires that an ISP’s customers “opt in” to any information-sharing program. In contrast, the FTC’s privacy rules governing dominant edge providers like Google and Facebook require their customers to “opt out” of any arrangement that monetizes personal data.

The FCC’s rationale for adopting a stricter standard was that ISPs allegedly enjoy a unique and pervasive visibility into broadband customer information that the edge providers do not have. A study by professor Peter Swire of Georgia Tech shattered that basis, however, showing that “non-ISPs often have access to more and a wider range of user information than ISPs.”

The FCCʼs privacy rules were needed to fill a temporary void in consumer protection created by—wait for it—the FCC. Thatʼs right: By reclassifying ISPs as common carriers in February 2015, the FCCʼs Open Internet Order divested the FTC of its statutory authority to regulate ISPs, as the FTC is barred from regulating common carriers. So one regulatory overreach begets another. This is how bureaucracies spin out of control.

Yesterday the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld President Obama’s so-called “net neutrality” regulations in a 2-1 decision. These are the rules that re-classified the Internet as a “public utility” under a Depression-era law, and leave us on the hook for a massive new tax increase and countless new regulations that are already having a dramatic negative impact on investment.

The Administration strongly supports House passage of S.J.Res. 34, which would nullify the Federal Communications Commission’s final rule titled “Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunication Services,” 81 Fed. Reg. 87274 (December 2, 2016). The rule applies the privacy requirements of the Communications Act of 1934 to broadband Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and other telecommunications carriers. In particular, the rule requires ISPs to obtain affirmative “opt-in” consent from consumers to use and share certain information, including app usage and web browsing history. It also allows ISPs to use and share other information, including e-mail addresses and service tier information, unless a customer “opts-out.” In doing so, the rule departs from the technology-neutral framework for online privacy administered by the Federal Trade Commission. This results in rules that apply very different regulatory regimes based on the identity of the online actor.

If S.J.Res. 34 were presented to the President, his advisors would recommend that he sign the bill into law.

This joint resolution nullifies the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission entitled "Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services." The rule published on December 2, 2016: (1) applies the customer privacy requirements of the Communications Act of 1934 to broadband Internet access service and other telecommunications services, (2) requires telecommunications carriers to inform customers about rights to opt in or opt out of the use or the sharing of their confidential information, (3) adopts data security and breach notification requirements, (4) prohibits broadband service offerings that are contingent on surrendering privacy rights, and (5) requires disclosures and affirmative consent when a broadband provider offers customers financial incentives in exchange for the provider's right to use a customer's confidential information.Congress.gov

For normal people who use normal English a summary :They (Congress) have Deleted your privacy at the ISP level, they can now sell your data.

This joint resolution nullifies the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission entitled "Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services." The rule published on December 2, 2016: (1) applies the customer privacy requirements of the Communications Act of 1934 to broadband Internet access service and other telecommunications services, (2) requires telecommunications carriers to inform customers about rights to opt in or opt out of the use or the sharing of their confidential information, (3) adopts data security and breach notification requirements, (4) prohibits broadband service offerings that are contingent on surrendering privacy rights, and (5) requires disclosures and affirmative consent when a broadband provider offers customers financial incentives in exchange for the provider's right to use a customer's confidential information.Congress.gov

For normal people who use normal English a summary :They (Congress) have Deleted your privacy at the ISP level, they can now sell your data.

Yes, I get that rule.So as long as the ISPs fall under FCC regulations, they can sell our data.

I get that.

What I DON'T get is how this helps get the ISPs under the FTC?If that's the plan (moving ISPs under FTC so we'll have privacy), then when will that happen.And how does removing the rule that they can't sell our data today HELP with the plan to move ISPs to the FTC?

Inquiring minds...

Logged

And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.Matthew 25:40

Yes, I get that rule.So as long as the ISPs fall under FCC regulations, they can sell our data.

I get that.

What I DON'T get is how this helps get the ISPs under the FTC?If that's the plan (moving ISPs under FTC so we'll have privacy), then when will that happen.And how does removing the rule that they can't sell our data today HELP with the plan to move ISPs to the FTC?

NOTE: FTC and FCC are different agencies! The FTC has more robust rules to protect your privacy. It also will not allow google special favors to do as they please, like the Obama scam did. This is why Trump is reverting it back to the FTC from the FCC.

And the situation didn't improve once the White House announced President Obama's plan and “ask[ed]” the FCC to “implement” it.89 The document in front of us today differs dramatically from the proposal that the FCC put out for comment last May. It differs so dramatically that even net neutrality advocates frantically rushed in recent days to make last-minute filings registering their concerns that the FCC might be going too far.90 Yet the American people to this day have not been allowed to see President Obama's plan. It has remained secret.

Especially given the unique importance of the Internet, Commissioner O'Rielly and I asked for the plan to be released to the public. Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune and House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton requested this as well. And according to a survey last week by a respected Democratic polling firm, 79% of the American people favored making the document public.91 But still the FCC's leadership has insisted on keeping it hidden. We have to pass President Obama's 317-page plan so that the American people can find out what is in it.

This isn't how the FCC should operate. We should be an independent agency making decisions in a transparent manner based on the law and the facts in the record. We shouldn't be a rubber stamp for political decisions made by the White House.

And we should have released this plan to the public, solicited their feedback, incorporated that input into the plan, and then proceeded to a vote. There was no need for us to resolve this matter today. There is no immediate crisis in the Internet marketplace that demands immediate action.

The backers of the President's plan know this. But they also know that the details of this plan cannot stand up to the light of day. They know that the more the American people learn about this plan, the less they like it. That is why this plan was developed behind closed doors at the White House. And that is why the plan has remained hidden from public view.[/b

Trump is correcting a fraud out of the Obama White House. It appears to be but one step toward control of the internet and that would have increased prices, etc. Obama did this totally in secret and defrauded the people, like he did on so many things during his admin. Disgusting!

Now the media lies to the public saying it will affect their privacy, when the whole change was a fraud that Trump is reversing to help the public. MORE LIES OUT OF THE MEDIA!

This joint resolution nullifies the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission entitled "Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services." The rule published on December 2, 2016: (1) applies the customer privacy requirements of the Communications Act of 1934 to broadband Internet access service and other telecommunications services, (2) requires telecommunications carriers to inform customers about rights to opt in or opt out of the use or the sharing of their confidential information, (3) adopts data security and breach notification requirements, (4) prohibits broadband service offerings that are contingent on surrendering privacy rights, and (5) requires disclosures and affirmative consent when a broadband provider offers customers financial incentives in exchange for the provider's right to use a customer's confidential information.Congress.gov

Let me break it down for you . . .

This joint resolution nullifies the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission entitled "Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services."Translation : First it says this is about Deleting Previous Legislation, then it gets specific by saying Who the Rule belong to (FCC) and then it says the name of it

Next it lists the 5 things to be DELETED

(1) applies the customer privacy requirements of the Communications Act of 1934 to broadband Internet access service and other telecommunications services, (2) requires telecommunications carriers to inform customers about rights to opt in or opt out of the use or the sharing of their confidential information, (3) adopts data security and breach notification requirements, (4) prohibits broadband service offerings that are contingent on surrendering privacy rights, and (5) requires disclosures and affirmative consent when a broadband provider offers customers financial incentives in exchange for the provider's right to use a customer's confidential information.Congress.gov

They nullified what Obama did because he did it in secret and it was wrong. The Ftc has handled internet privacy since the beginning of the internet. Obama tried to change it and totally reclassify it. Bad policy. This would allow more control over the net in the future. That means they would eventually control anyone who disagrees with them. Thats not a free internet. So now they lie. Unacceptable!

You should read the dissent posted above. What you are reading is very short and thus gives no real background.

You should read the dissent posted above. What you are reading is very short and thus gives no real background.

Stop changing the titlte of this thread! Thank you,

I also spent some time on Jerome Corsi's little speech on the Alex Jones Show, I even went so far as to Transcribe some of it, as it was that shocking.

Corsi argues that the current law which provides only limited protection, should be scrapped so we have no protection.

Corsi also makes the most backwards and inside out claim - which is a topic in its own right :Now the Internet Service Providers don't typically have your user data, they, they, tie you into the internet and then where you go is not traced by the ISPs.

Well the ISPs would never, ever publicly admit they are tracking user activity because that would be a confession of illegal activity. Secondly, they would loose a lot of customers. So in one sense its true, but it is a complete misdirection because the change in the law is to allow the ISPs to do exactly what Corsi says they are not doing....

I can break it down . . .

Internet Service Providers don't typically have your user dataNote the qualifications, typically - hell yea its go to jail illegal unless this new Law gets signed by Trump.

Internet Service Providers don't typically have your user dataThe ISP does not have just your user data like Facebook - It has all your data.

they, they, tie you into the internet Yes ISP is the bit that connects you to the internet - Its mandatory - unlike using Edge Providers such as Facebook.

and then where you go is not traced by the ISPs.The whole point of the new law is to allow ISPs to track everything you do on the internet. We are not talking just what you do in your browser, but all the DNS queries.

This has nothing what so ever to do with my views on Trump - Trump has not Signed !!!!IF he signs it, then I will dump some of it on Trump - but so far it has been the other lot, not the Whitehouse.Lastly, sorry for any errors in my transcription.

Today, the Obama administration officially published the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) so-called net neutrality rules in the Federal Register. These rules would undo a decade of free-market, hands-off Internet policy that has made the Internet the greatest engine of economic growth, creativity, and innovation the world has ever seen. They would set us down a path to reducing the Internet into a government-regulated, government-controlled public utility.

Obama made several moves for a takeover of the Internet! There is much more to this than one short Resolution seeking rectification to what Obama secretly created in the last days of his pathetic admin. Obama acted incrementally, like globalists typically do. We must look back over 8 yrs at the totality of his acts to see the truth. He gave over ICANN also.

Today, the Obama administration officially published the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) so-called net neutrality rules in the Federal Register. These rules would undo a decade of free-market, hands-off Internet policy that has made the Internet the greatest engine of economic growth, creativity, and innovation the world has ever seen. They would set us down a path to reducing the Internet into a government-regulated, government-controlled public utility.

Note also how there is major censorship currently on the net claiming copyright. This is really about views they dont like. Put the whole picture together people. Be warned! This is about control of the internet and it is being done incrementally on many fronts!

Imo, Trump is trying to roll these controls back so you can keep your free and open internet!

Internet service providers may be able to gather private and sensitive data from their customers and sell it to the highest bidder, now that the Senate has voted to repeal some FCC regulations.

On Thursday, the Senate voted 50-48 along party lines to approve a joint resolution that overturns Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules relating to “Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services.”

After the vote, the FCC released a statement saying that if the rules are overturned, it will create “a massive gap in consumer protection law as broadband and cable companies now have no discernible privacy requirements. This is the antithesis of putting #ConsumersFirst,” FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn and FTC Commissioner Terrell McSweeny said.

On tonight’s Big Picture, Thom discusses court arguments on the Muslim ban and Trump’s foreign policy towards Iran with Jamal Abdi, Policy Director of the National Iranian American Council. Then, Thom talks to Bryan Pruitt of RedState and Kymone Freeman of We Act Radio about the FCC head’s push to gut net neutrality, and whether our country is really governed by Donald Trump or Steve Bannon.

On tonight’s Big Picture, Thom discusses court arguments on the Muslim ban and Trump’s foreign policy towards Iran with Jamal Abdi, Policy Director of the National Iranian American Council. Then, Thom talks to Bryan Pruitt of RedState and Kymone Freeman of We Act Radio about the FCC head’s push to gut net neutrality, and whether our country is really governed by Donald Trump or Steve Bannon.

Good interview... but DISTURBING--->

They are reconstructing the cable business model - ON THE INTERNET!!! BULLSH*T!

Pay to view news - packages like Cable offers - and guess what news WON'T BE in the 'packages'? (the idiot sitting there, suggesting consumers can just 'change' their cable provider is living in an alternate universe.)For MOST people, there is only ONE provider.

Corporate-controlled MSM today...Corporate-controlled Internet information is on the horizon.We've seen this coming for long time.

However, this goes to explaining why the infighting between FCC and FTC.Internet as a corporate business enterprise --> THAT'S FTC.People on the internet are "consumers" and they need "advertisements" - FTC.People on the internet are troublemakers, mucking up the 'official narratives' - they need to be shut down --- FTC.

It won't be Federal COMMUNICATIONS... it will be Federal TRADE. Big difference.

I wonder what Alex thinks of this possibility - because I don't expect to see Infowars on the list of 'cable' news packages presented to internet users by the same MSM people who bring you MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, et al. Will there be bandwidth for independent news organizations to send their broadcasts out? Or will they reside on the V E R Y S L O W net?

Logged

And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.Matthew 25:40

Most Americans won't notice it. They will still be able to get to their favorite sites; their bank, the online shopping sites, facebook or myspace. The only people who will notice this will be people who look for truth online; Alex Jones sites, this forum, Rense, Alan Watt, and all torrent sites will be blocked (no documentaries), no David Icke, no WeAreChange sites, YouTube will be completely scrubbed, and they will use Artificial Intelligence (Ptech) to search for anything that might be 'truth' - by using key words.. or by using semantic understanding of languages (all languages on earth) - to 'filter' out the truth. If it fails to block a truth site; it will 'learn' from that mistake and will never 'fail' on that particular criteria again. It is unstoppable.

What will all the large and small private internet companies do?

The cybersecurity bill affects any company or entity that the president decides is part of the 'critical' infrastructure - which could include your home computer. When they describe 'critical infrastructure' - the implication is that there might be pc's that aren't part of this. This is misleading and designed to give you the impression that your pc won't be affected. Don't forget they do these things "incrementally" - today its federal government computers, tomorrow it's your pc. The bill will allow this to happen; count on it.

Wont there be a huge outcry as livelihoods fold everywhere?

Do you hear a huge outcry about the stolen $28 trillion? Are people out in the streets screaming about the unemployment rate now? They approach these things in a way that has been meticulously planned for years - they do it slowly. Companies will have a choice to either comply with the regulations, or be forced out of business. They will choose to comply.

When the free and open internet is taken down, people will welcome it. Why? Because it will be preceeded by a cyber false flag that will threaten your ravaged bank accounts; and when that happens, the NWO masters expect you to get down on your knees and thank them for 'protecting' you from the big bad cyber attackers. They will not just turn off the internet.. they will leave you with a freshly scrubbed, sanitized-for-your-protection version of the internet where you'll still have the banking, myspace, amazon, porno sites, game sites; and other distractions to focus on while the rest of the constitution is thrown into the shredder.

There won't be a huge outcry because most people won't even notice.

"Net Neutrality" is a vaguely described 'idea' - the idea of freedom; equality of packets flowing at the same bitrates across the net - no packet left behind kind of thing.

It's been put in place to pacify us while the globalists continue to implement more changes to take control of information flow between people. This is a critical component of their strategy to reach a global government. If the switch from FCC to FTC is any indication, the commercialization of the internet will see Net Neutrality turned into the more accurate intent from the start: Net PAY-ME.

... On a far less shocking and dramatic note, the latest FCC 3 to 2 vote on Thursday to “maintain net neutrality” has been treated in the press as a triumph for the people. Yet before we internet users celebrate, several keys factors still need to be pondered. We already know the overriding history in North America where giant transnational corporations enjoy more individual rights than us individuals in this age of globalism. The people may have averted a disastrous lost battle but the war of corporate greed winning out over the rights of people goes on. The FCC’s ruling declared that the internet falls under the rules and regulations of the telecommunications industry and we know what’s been happening there. Six corporate entities virtually control all the world’s major media outlets.

Secondly, the 300-page details of the FCC decision has yet to be released. Literally armies of telecom lawyers will be analyzing every line of 300 pages with a fine-tooth comb just searching for the myriad of potential loopholes by which the large corporate internet providers can find ways to squeeze additional money for the giants at our expense. Finally, the FCC has a special new rule called the “general conduct rule” whereby as in FCC Chairman Wheeler’s words, “it wants to referee” in getting to decide what it deems unfair or “hurts consumers, competition or innovation.” With such a vague and wide open birth, the FCC wields enormous power to interpret its 300 pages of new rules in what it considers running afoul of “proper conduct” and it may not be in favor of us internet consumers. Meanwhile, the telecom lawyers have unlimited time and money to finagle, lobby and court FCC’s favor, not unlike Big Business rules over the EPA in getting away with all kinds of unregulated pollution and Big Pharma literally owns the FDA.

Big Gov operates in deviously sneaky ways. It knows ruling against net neutrality now would cause a storm of fury in America that temporarily Washington is choosing at this moment to avoid. But as mentioned, the mountains of fine print perfectly suited for loopholes contained in 300 pages of rules can easily turn this ephemeral victory into another staggering long term defeat for the people. It’s simply akin to the hard kill being deferred to the soft kill strategy, quietly sneaking through little changes that in their totality will eventually peck away at net neutrality and ultimately kill it. We need to always remember that in recent years gov.corps is one entity that historically favors corporate greed and profit over the well-being of a bunch of humans. The power elite’s agenda remains to offer less internet services, less access to not only the internet but to particular websites that will come at higher prices to access in the future.

Indeed the growing threat of our tyrannical fascist government cutting off access to independent alternative news sites falling victim to state censorship is still very real and extremely foreboding. Increasingly the elite’s agenda is to disempower the global masses by keeping them ignorant, dumbed down and in the dark without any access to the truth. Taking away much of the World Wide Web is their sinister strategy that’s still operating at all times despite this recent decision.

The totalitarian government in Washington has realized that their propagandizing mainstream media machine has been rapidly losing its credibility and audience. Upwards of 4 out of 5 Americans today aren’t even tuning in to the likes of NBC’s Brian Williams’ fake show for MSM’s inaccurate reporting of the latest unfolding events in the globalized censored world. And that trend arrived long before we learned Williams turned out to be another mainstream liar.

The totalitarian government’s fusion into corporate fascism has long recognized that supplying the world with free internet allows the masses access to alternative independent news sites for far more accurate reporting of world news and developments. At increasing risk of censorship black outs and persecution, independent news strives to tell the truth to the rest of the world, exposing the official narrative of pure lies and evildoing perpetrated by the criminal syndicate acting as the rogue government. A continued free and independent internet news outlet making suppression of the truth difficult poses a real threat to fascism. That’s why free internet is still under attack.

The other reason the internet poses a threat to New World Order is its enormous capacity to provide instant global communication between billions of humans around the globe that together possess a potentially powerful resistance movement opposing the oppressive tactics being implemented by globalized multinational governments. Ultimately an awakened, informed and empowered citizenry of the world united in solidarity poses the biggest threat to global fascism and its New World Order. That’s why through Executive Order Obama has given himself supreme dictatorial authority to shut down the internet in America under the pretense of a national emergency.

Note: My only objection to that is the last sentence, where the author states, "That’s why through Executive Order Obama has given himself supreme dictatorial authority to shut down the internet in America under the pretense of a national emergency."

It wasn't "Obama" - it was CSIS.Any policies enacted by presidents do NOT originate in the WH.There is a much bigger machine orchestrating things - bigger than any sitting president - and part of the government the continues as presidents come and go.

Others say the president should be able to take such action. James Lewis, senior fellow for the Center for Strategic and International Studies, which last year issued a set of cybersecurity recommendations to Congress, likened the provision to President George W. Bush’s call to shut down airlines after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

“It seems foolish not to have the same authority for cyberspace,” he said. “It’s not that the president will wake up in a bad mood one day and implode Yahoo. This would apply only to severe national emergencies. … This is a great opportunity to blast us into a new level of discussion about cybersecurity.”

So we have "fake news" hyped up in the media: problem-reaction-solution...We also have the fear-mongering of Russian internet bots mind-controlling the entire population to elect Trump: problem-reaction-solution...And we have the Guccifer2.0 fake Russian leaker meme: problem-reaction-solution...

And now we have a lifting of privacy protections for internet users on behalf of the ISPs, who can sell the data. And somehow this FCC regulation being lifted will 'help' transition to FTC?And how is moving ISP business to the FTC a 'win' for the people?

That part is still a mystery to me.Can anyone explain it?

Logged

And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.Matthew 25:40

They've been gunning for this for years ... Will an infiltrated, weakened and surrounded Trump fail us? hmmm...

Logged

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

This is a bait and switch. In actuality they will use this to implement a fairness doctrine as well as other current limitations on physical free speech. BEWARE OF NET NEUTRALITY LAWS!THE NET SHOULD BE SELF GOVERNING IN THE SAME FASHION AS REAL FREE TRADE AND TRUE UN-CORRUPTED CAPITALISM -WOULD BE WITHOUT WORLD BANKERS OF THE NWO TRYING TO F*CK US ALL.

Other key points that they faill to mention. that local and federal tax dollars are paid to these telecom companies to establish and pay for these networks. These networks are then allocated even more tax dollars as part of federal projects that have to pay these same telecom monthly access fees and Bandwidth charges. (Talk about on f*cked paradox)

" Some EULAs go so far as to claim ownership of any work product created with their software." for the very reason that it is the ONLY way to insure that GPL code remain GPL , OPEN SOURCE AND FREE TO THE PUBLIC! In fact the GPL goes as far as to say that all one has to do is change 51% of the EXISTING CODE TO BE CONSIDERED A NEW PIECE OF SOFTWARE AND THEREFORE BELONGING TO THE AUTHOR! So, it is self regulating even!As are most freeware and open sources licenses...

The interesting thing about this whole debate is that the Obama rule was not set to go into effect until end of 2017.

Also, there really is no privacy on the net and your rights are violated daily by the big shots (Google, Facebook, etc ) who dont operate by any rules. You sign away your rights as soon as you start a Facebook pg.

Censorship of youtube videos happen daily if you have the "wrong" view.

Alternative sites are called rogue and you get warnings when you go to such sites.

On and on the control continues, and is getting worse.

One concern i have is Trump is not computer / internet savvy and is depending on his cabinet and other "experts". However, I think he means well.

The Fcc and Ftc need to get their act together and stop squabbling. Do their jobs.

The more i look at this, it is looking more and more like another distraction. No matter what the Ftc Fcc do, the big boys will do as they please and continue getting into your privacy. Until the globalists are dealt with, that invasion of privacy will not stop. It will get worse.

Bottom line: We must demand a free and open internet like it once was, and nothing less is acceptable.